Fundamental theory of statistical particle dynamics

Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics

Volumn 81, Issue 6, 2010, Pages

  Mazenko, Gene F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BROWNIAN MOTION; CLASSICAL PARTICLE; ERGODICS; FIELD THEORY; FUNCTIONAL THEORY; FUNDAMENTAL THEORY; LIQUID-GLASS TRANSITION; NON-ERGODIC TRANSITION; PARTICLE DYNAMICS;

BROWNIAN MOVEMENT;

GLASS TRANSITION;

EID: 77953440627     PISSN: 15393755     EISSN: 15502376     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.81.061102     Document Type: Article

References (168)

1. G. Mazenko, Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics (Wiley, New York, 2006) 10.1002/9783527618958
2. Brownian motion is interpreted here as a dynamics that is noise driven. For an individual Brownian particle located at position R acted upon by noise η, one has R = η. This is clearly the continuum version of the random-walk problem.
3. J. Zinn-Justin, Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena, 4th ed. (Clarendon, Oxford, 2002). 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198509233.001.0001
4. G. Mazenko, Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics (Wiley, New York, 2000), p. 101.
5. By self-consistency we mean that the correlation and response functions of interest satisfy kinetic equations where the collision kernels, self-energies, or memory functions can be expressed in terms of the full physical correlation and response functions. In the areas of critical dynamics and the liquid-glass transition, this is essential in generating symmetry breaking solutions. This can generate a multiplicity of solutions not available in bare perturbation theory.
6. Boltzmann's Stosszahlansatz is a prime example of a decoupling approximation. In the collision integral of the Boltzmann equation he assumed that the two-particle distribution function factorizes into a product of two one-particle distributions, f 2 → f 1 f 1.
7. L. Boltzmann, Math-Naturwiss, KI 66, 275 (1872)
8. S. G. Brush, Kinetic Theory (Pergamon, New York, 1966), Vol. 2.
9. M. H. Ernst, E. H. Hauge, and J. M. J. van Leeuwen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 25, 1254 (1970) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.25.1254
10. K. Kawasaki, Phys. Lett. A 32, 379 (1970) 10.1016/0375-9601(70)90009-5
11. K. Kawasaki, Prog. Theor. Phys. 45, 1691 (1971) 10.1143/PTP.45.1691
12. Y. Pomeau and P. Resibois, Phys. Rep. 19, 63 (1975) 10.1016/0370-1573(75) 90019-8
13. M. Fixman, J. Chem. Phys. 36, 310 (1962) 10.1063/1.1732502
14. L. P. Kadanoff and J. Swift, Phys. Rev. 166, 89 (1968) 10.1103/PhysRev.166.89
15. K. Kawasaki, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 61, 1 (1970). 10.1016/0003-4916(70)90375-1
16. E. Zaccarelli, G. Foffi, F. Sciortino, P. Tartaglia, and K. A. Dawson, Europhys. Lett. 55, 157 (2001). 10.1209/epl/i2001-00395-x
17. In the weak supercooling regime, detailed predictions for the space and time dependence of the long-time decay of density correlations have been formulated using the ideal mode-coupling theory MCT, one of the first approaches to identify the existence of the crossover temperature. The agreement of MCT predictions with experimental findings and molecular dynamics simulations both for atomic and molecular models supports the view that MCT is indeed able to describe the slow dynamics in weak supercooled states.
18. W. Goetze, in Liquids, Freezing, and Glass Transition, edited by, J. P. Hansen,,, D. Levesque,, and, J. Zinn-Justin, (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991)
19. and S. Das, Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 785 (2004). 10.1103/RevModPhys.76.785 (Pubitemid 40180192)
20. The important idea of an ergodic-nonergodic (ENE) transition exists independent of whether it conforms to the details of mode-coupling theory. The defining property of an ENE transition is that as a function of a control parameter there is crossover from an ergodic phase [lim t → G ρ ρ (q, t) = 0] to a region with nonergodic kinetics [lim t → G ρ ρ (q, t) = A 2 (q) > 0].
21. G. F. Mazenko, Phys. Rev. A 7, 209 (1973) 10.1103/PhysRevA.7.209
22. L. Sjogren and A. Sjolander, J. Phys. C 12, 4369 (1979) 10.1088/0022-3719/12/21/005
23. E. Leutheusser, Phys. Rev. A 29, 2765 (1984) 10.1103/PhysRevA.29.2765
24. U. Bengtzelius, W. Goetze, and A. Sjolander, J. Phys. C 17, 5915 (1984) 10.1088/0022-3719/17/33/005
25. More recent efforts to make microscopic contact (derive) mode-coupling theory are reflected in Ref. where they comment: "Despite its remarkable practical success, the presence of apparently uncontrolled approximations in the derivation of the MCT equations makes it difficult to gain insights into possible improvements of the theory. The aim of this paper is to present a new derivation of the ideal MCT equations, starting from the microscopic equations for the evolution of the density (Newtons equations) and writing them as a linear generalized Langevin equation. A formally exact expression for the memory kernel is derived and, on making the approximation that the noise in the Langevin equation is Gaussian, the standard MCT equations are obtained. Note that the proposition of Gaussian noise implies that the density fluctuations are also Gaussian."
26. J. Wu and J. Cao, Phys. Rev. E 67, 061116 (2003) 10.1103/PhysRevE.67. 061116
27. S. P. Das and G. F. Mazenko, Phys. Rev. A 34, 2265 (1986) 10.1103/PhysRevA.34.2265
28. S. P. Das and G. F. Mazenko, Phys. Rev. E 79, 021504 (2009) 10.1103/PhysRevE.79.021504
29. G. F. Mazenko, Phys. Rev. E 78, 031123 (2008) 10.1103/PhysRevE.78.031123
30. D. S. Dean, J. Phys. A 29, L613 (1996) 10.1088/0305-4470/29/24/001
31. K. Kawasaki and S. Miyazima, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 103, 423 (1997) 10.1007/s002570050396
32. K. Miyazaki and D. R. Reichman, J. Phys. A 38, L343 (2005) 10.1088/0305-4470/38/20/L03
33. G. Biroli and J.-P. Bouchaud, Europhys. Lett. 67, 21 (2004) 10.1209/epl/i2004-10044-6
34. A. Andreanov, G. Biroli, and A. Lefevre, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. (2006), P07008 10.1088/1742-5468/2006/07/P07008
35. B. Kim and K. Kawasaki, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. (2008), P02004 10.1088/1742-5468/2008/02/P02004
36. A. Crisanti, Nucl. Phys. B 796, 425 (2008). 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2007.11. 039
37. B. Cichocki and W. Hess, Physica A 141, 475 (1987) 10.1016/0378-4371(87) 90176-2
38. K. Kawasaki, Physica A 215, 61 (1995). 10.1016/0378-4371(95)00012-V
39. S. C. Glotzer, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 274, 342 (2000). 10.1016/S0022- 3093(00)00225-8
40. L. Berthier, Phys. Rev. E 69, 020201 (2004).] 10.1103/PhysRevE.69.020201
41. Our interest here is the theoretical work of Biroli and Bouchaud in Ref.. Biroli and Bouchaud sketched a field theoretical calculation of C 4 (r, t) compatible with mode-coupling theory. This calculation leads to a diverging length scale at the ideal glass transition. They find an upper critical dimension of six in their calculation. This work is very provocative since at the level of the dynamic structure factor it is well known that MCT does not contain a large length as one approaches the ergodic-nonergodic transition. Biroli and Bouchaud suggest that one must dig deeper into the theory, look at the four-point quantity C 4, to find this diverging length. However this calculation paints a picture rather than gives the results of a rigorous calculation. One of the goals for the theory developed here is to connect the collective behaviors found at the two-point level to the behavior of the three- and four-point density correlation functions.
42. S. Ma and G. Mazenko, Phys. Rev. B 11, 4077 (1975). 10.1103/PhysRevB.11. 4077
43. Purely dissipative Langevin systems have long been used to describe the order parameter dynamics in magnetic and superfluid systems. There is a balance between the force due to the gradient of the effective free energy and the persistent noise in a thermalized system.
44. E. Gozzi, Phys. Lett. B 201, 525 (1988) 10.1016/0370-2693(88)90611-9
45. E. Gozzi, M. Reuter, and W. D. Thacker, Phys. Rev. D 40, 3363 (1989) 10.1103/PhysRevD.40.3363
46. E. Deotto, E. Gozzi, and D. Mauro, J. Math. Phys. 44, 5937 (2003) 10.1063/1.1623334
47. E. Gozzi and M. Reuter, Chaos, Solitons Fractals 4, 1117 (1994). 10.1016/0960-0779(94)90026-4
48. Their interest is in the symmetry structure of the coupled spaces when one allows the classical system to be coupled to a system of ghost fermions. See below.
49. Fokker-Planck dynamics in modern terms has two complementary meanings. For systems of particles governed by phase-space coordinates and with a damping component in their dynamics the equation satisfied by the associated probability distribution is called a Fokker-Planck equation. As pointed out by Lax and Zwanzig, the associated equation of motion for the phase-space variables is referred to as a Langevin equation. Subsequently the transition generally from a stochastic equation of motion to the time evolution of the associated probability description is called going from a generalized Langevin equation description to generalized Fokker-Planck description. See Ref..
50. A. Einstein, Ann. Phys. 322, 549 (1905) 10.1002/andp.19053220806
51. M. V. Smoluchowski, Phys. Z. 17, 557 (1916)
52. P. Langevin, Compt. Rend. 146, 530 (1908)
53. A. D. Fokker, Ann. Phys. 43, 812 (1914)
54. and M. Planck, Sitzungsber. K. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 23, 324 (1917)
55. O. Klein, Ark. Mat., Astron. Fys. 16, 5 (1922)
56. H. Kramers, Physica 7, 284 (1940) 10.1016/S0031-8914(40)90098-2
57. G. E. Uhlenbeck and L. S. Ornstein, Phys. Rev. 36, 823 (1930) 10.1103/PhysRev.36.823
58. S. Chandrasekhar, Rev. Mod. Phys. 15, 1 (1943) 10.1103/RevModPhys.15.1
59. M. Lax, Rev. Mod. Phys. 32, 25 (1960) 10.1103/RevModPhys.32.25
60. M. Lax, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 14, 248 (1960) 10.1016/0022-3697(60)90237-7
61. M. Lax, Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 541 (1966) 10.1103/RevModPhys.38.541
62. J. L. Lebowitz and E. Rubin, Phys. Rev. 131, 2381 (1963) 10.1103/PhysRev.131.2381
63. J. Deutch and I. Oppenheim, J. Chem. Phys. 54, 3547 (1971) 10.1063/1.1675379
64. T. J. Murphy and J. L. Aguirre, J. Chem. Phys. 57, 2098 (1972) 10.1063/1.1678535
65. R. Zwanzig, Adv. Chem. Phys. 15, 325 (1969) 10.1002/9780470143605.ch17
66. B. J. Ackerson, J. Chem. Phys. 64, 242 (1976) 10.1063/1.431957
67. W. Dieterich and I. Peschel, Physica A 95, 208 (1979). 10.1016/0378-4371(79)90052-9
68. J.-P. Hansen and I. R. McDonald, Theory of Simple Liquids, 3rd ed. (Academic Press, New York, 2006)
69. J. E. Mayer, J. Chem. Phys. 5, 67 (1937) 10.1063/1.1749933
70. J. E. Mayer and P. G. Ackermann, J. Chem. Phys. 5, 74 (1937) 10.1063/1.1749934
71. J. E. Mayer and S. F. Harrison, J. Chem. Phys. 6, 87 (1938) 10.1063/1.1750208
72. J. E. Mayer and E. Montroll, J. Chem. Phys. 9, 2 (1941) 10.1063/1.1750822
73. and E. Montroll and J. E. Mayer, J. Chem. Phys. 9, 626 (1941) 10.1063/1.1750964
74. J. G. Kirkwood, J. Chem. Phys. 3, 300 (1935) 10.1063/1.1749657
75. J. Yvon, Actualités Sci. Ind. 203 (1935)
76. H. D. Ursell, Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 23, 685 (1927) 10.1017/S0305004100011191
77. and M. Born and H. S. Green, A General Kinetic Theory of Liquids (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1949).
78. R. J. Riddell and G. E. Uhlenbeck, J. Chem. Phys. 21, 2056 (1953) 10.1063/1.1698742
79. G. W. Ford and G. E. Uhlenbeck, PNAS 42, 122 (1956) 10.1073/pnas.42.3.122
80. G. W. Ford and G. E. Uhlenbeck, PNAS 42, 529 (1956) 10.1073/pnas.42.8.529
81. G. W. Ford and G. E. Uhlenbeck, PNAS 43, 163 (1957) 10.1073/pnas.43.1.163
82. G. W. Ford, R. Z. Norman, and G. E. Uhlenbeck, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 42, 203 (1956) 10.1073/pnas.42.4.203
83. K. Hiroike, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 12, 864 (1957) 10.1143/JPSJ.12.864
84. T. Morita and K. Hiroike, Prog. Theor. Phys. 23, 385 (1960) 10.1143/PTP.23.385
85. T. Morita and K. Hiroike, Prog. Theor. Phys. 24, 679 (1960) 10.1143/PTP.24.679
86. T. Morita and K. Hiroike, Prog. Theor. Phys. 23, 1003 (1960) 10.1143/PTP.23.1003
87. J. M. J. van Leeuwen, J. Groenvald, and J. de Boer, Physica 25, 792 (1959) 10.1016/0031-8914(59)90004-7
88. E. Meeron, J. Chem. Phys. 27, 1238 (1957) 10.1063/1.1743985
89. J. Yvon, Nuovo Cimento 9, 144 (1958) 10.1007/BF02824240
90. C. De Dominicis, J. Math. Phys. 3, 983 (1962) 10.1063/1.1724313
91. C. De Dominicis, J. Math. Phys. 4, 255 (1963). 10.1063/1.1703949
92. N. N. Bogolyubov, J. Phys. (USSR) 10, 265 (1946)
93. Studies in Statistical Mechanics (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1962), Vol. 2.
94. J. K. Percus, in The Equilibrium Theory of Classical Fluids, edited by, H. L. Frisch, and, J. L. Lebowitz, (Benjamin, New York, 1964).
95. J. K. Percus and G. S. Yevick, Phys. Rev. 110, 1 (1958). 10.1103/PhysRev.110.1
96. J. S. Rowlinson, Rep. Prog. Phys. 28, 169 (1965). 10.1088/0034-4885/28/1/ 306
97. The Ornstein-Zernike relation connects the radial distribution function to the direct correlation function. See L. S. Ornstein and F. Zernike in Ref..
98. L. Onsager and S. Machlup, Phys. Rev. 91, 1505 (1953) 10.1103/PhysRev.91.1505
99. R. H. Kraichnan, J. Fluid Mech. 5, 497 (1959) 10.1017/S0022112059000362
100. R. H. Kraichnan, J. Math. Phys. 2, 124 (1961) 10.1063/1.1724206
101. R. H. Kraichnan, J. Math. Phys. 3, 205 (1962) 10.1063/1.1703782
102. R. H. Kraichnan, Phys. Fluids 7, 1723 (1964) 10.1063/1.2746572
103. H. W. Wyld, Jr., Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 14, 143 (1961) 10.1016/0003-4916(61) 90056-2
104. P. C. Martin, E. D. Siggia, and H. A. Rose, Phys. Rev. A 8, 423 (1973). 10.1103/PhysRevA.8.423
105. H. Janssen, Z. Phys. B23, 377 (1976)
106. R. Baush, H. K. Janssen, and H. Wagner, Z. Phys. B24, 113 (1976).
107. C. De Dominicis and L. Peliti, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 505 (1977) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.38.505
108. C. De Dominicis and L. Peliti, Phys. Rev. B 18, 353 (1978) 10.1103/PhysRevB.18.353
109. C. De Dominicis, E. Brézin, and J. Zinn-Justin, Phys. Rev. B 12, 4945 (1975). 10.1103/PhysRevB.12.4945
110. R. Graham, Springer Tracts in Modern Physics (Springer, Berlin, 1973) Vol. 66.
111. U. Deker and F. Haake, Phys. Rev. A 11, 2043 (1975) 10.1103/PhysRevA.11. 2043
112. R. Phythian, J. Phys. A 8, 1423 (1975) 10.1088/0305-4470/8/9/011
113. R. Phythian, J. Phys. A 9, 269 (1976) 10.1088/0305-4470/9/2/012
114. U. Deker, Phys. Rev. A 19, 846 (1979) 10.1103/PhysRevA.19.846
115. F. Langouche, D. Roekaents, and E. Tirapegui, Physica A 95, 252 (1979) 10.1016/0378-4371(79)90054-2
116. R. V. Jensen, J. Stat. Phys. 25, 183 (1981). 10.1007/BF01022182
117. C. De Dominicis, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 12, 567 (1975). 10.1007/BF02785928
118. P. C. Hohenberg and B. I. Halperin, Rev. Mod. Phys. 49, 435 (1977) 10.1103/RevModPhys.49.435
119. - ψ̄ Mψ. See page 14 in JZJ. These are the ghost fermions and eliminating the determinant in favor of the fermions gives a coupled fermion-nonfermion system.
120. G. Parisi and N. Sourlas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 744 (1979) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.43.744
121. G. Parisi and N. Sourlas, Nucl. Phys. B 206, 321 (1982) 10.1016/0550-3213(82)90538-7
122. G. Parisi and Wu-yong-shi, Sci. Sin. 24, 484 (1981)
123. M. V. Feigel'man and A. M. Tsvelik, Sov. Phys. JETP 56, 823 (1982)
124. M. V. Feigel'man and A. M. Tsvelik, Phys. Lett. A 95, 469 (1983) 10.1016/0375-9601(83)90497-8
125. E. Gozzi, Phys. Rev. D 28, 1922 (1983) 10.1103/PhysRevD.28.1922
126. J. Zinn-Justin, Nucl. Phys. B 275, 135 (1986) 10.1016/0550-3213(86)90592- 4
127. G. Munoz and W. S. Burgett, J. Stat. Phys. 56, 59 (1989). 10.1007/BF01044231
128. S. Chaturvedi, A. K. Kapoor, and V. Srinivason, Z. Phys. B 57, 249 (1984) 10.1007/BF01318417
129. S. Chaturvedi, A. K. Kapoor and V. Srinivason, J. Phys. A 17, 2037 (1984) 10.1088/0305-4470/17/10/016
130. G. Grinstein, J. Appl. Phys. 55, 2371 (1984). 10.1063/1.333669
131. E. Gozzi, Phys. Rev. D 30, 1218 (1984) 10.1103/PhysRevD.30.1218
132. L. Onsager, Phys. Rev. 37, 405 (1931) 10.1103/PhysRev.37.405
133. L. Onsager, Phys. Rev. 38, 2265 (1931) 10.1103/PhysRev.38.2265
134. N. B. Casimir, Rev. Mod. Phys. 17, 343 (1945). 10.1103/RevModPhys.17.343
135. V. Y. Chernyak, M. Chertkov, and C. Jarzynski, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. (2006), P08001 10.1088/1742-5468/2006/08/P08001
136. D. J. Evans, E. G. D. Cohen, and G. P. Morris, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 2401 (1993) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.2401
137. D. J. Evans and D. J. Searles, Phys. Rev. E 50, 1645 (1994) 10.1103/PhysRevE.50.1645
138. G. Gallavotti and E. G. D. Cohen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 2694 (1995) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.2694
139. J. Kurchan, J. Phys. A 31, 3719 (1998) 10.1088/0305-4470/31/16/003
140. J. L. Lebowitz and H. Spohn, J. Stat. Phys. 95, 333 (1999) 10.1023/A:1004589714161
141. G. N. Bochkov and Yu. E. Kuzovlev, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 72, 238 (1977)
142. [G. N. Bochkov and Yu. E. Kuzovlev, Sov. Phys. JETP 45, 125 (1977)]
143. C. Jarzynski, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2690 (1997) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.78. 2690
144. C. Jarzynski, Phys. Rev. E 56, 5018 (1997) 10.1103/PhysRevE.56.5018
145. G. E. Crooks, J. Stat. Phys. 90, 1481 (1998) 10.1023/A:1023208217925
146. G. E. Crooks, Phys. Rev. E 60, 2721 (1999) 10.1103/PhysRevE.60.2721
147. K. Mallick, M. Moshe, and H. Orland, e-print arXiv:0711.2059
148. H. Rose, J. Stat. Phys. 20, 415 (1979). 10.1007/BF01011780
149. ). If the density is a Gaussian variable, then W [u] = d d x 1 d d x 2 u (x 1) G (x 1 - x 2) u (x 2).
150. JZJ gives an argument on page 63 for choosing θ (0) = 1 / 2.
151. This is just the functional generalization of the standard matrix identity exp [1 2 i j K i j δ 2 δ h i δ h j] e i h i i = e i h i i exp [1 2 i j K i j i j].
152. L. P. Kadanoff and G. Baym, Quantum Statistical Mechanics (Benjamin, 1962)
153. G. Baym and L. P. Kadanoff, Phys. Rev. 124, 287 (1961) 10.1103/PhysRev.124.287
154. G. Baym, Phys. Rev. 127, 1391 (1962). 10.1103/PhysRev.127.1391
155. In different contexts the kinetic kernels have different names. In the field theory protocol the kernels are typically called self-energies, in the kinetic theory protocol, where the analysis is in terms of retarded quantities, the kernel is called a memory function, and in the general case it can be called a dynamic direct correlation function.
156. R. Velenich, C. Chamon, L. Cugliandolo, and D. Kreimer, J. Phys. A 41, 235002 (2008). 10.1088/1751-8113/41/23/235002
157. W. Kohn and J. Luttinger, Phys. Rev. 108, 590 (1957) 10.1103/PhysRev.108. 590
158. J. von Neumann, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 18, 70 (1932) 10.1073/pnas.18.1.70
159. H. Koopman and J. von Neumann, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 18, 255 (1932). 10.1073/pnas.18.3.255
160. P. C. Martin and J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 115, 1342 (1959) 10.1103/PhysRev.115.1342
161. L. P. Kadanoff and G. Baym, Quantum Statistical Mechanics (Benjamin, New York, 1962)
162. Quantum Thermal Green's functions must satisfy Kubo-Martin-Schwinger Boundary Conditions, see references in Ref..
163. J. K. Percus, in The Equilibrium Theory of Classical Fluids, edited by, H. L. Frisch, and, J. L. Lebowitz, (Benjamin, New York, 1964), p. II-72.
164. The decay time in the problem is inversely proportional to the static structure factor. This clearly, away from q = 0, leads to a slowing down near the first structure factor peak.
165. J.-P. Hansen and I. R. McDonald, Theory of Simple Liquids, 3rd ed., (Academic Press, New York, 2006), Chap..
166. W. Goetze in Liquids, Freezing, and Glass Transition, edited by, J. P. Hansen,,, D. Levesque,, and, J. Zinn-Justin, (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991).
167. R. M. Mazo, Brownian Motion (Clarendon, Oxford, 2002).
168. B. S. Kim and G. F. Mazenko, J. Stat. Phys. 64, 631 (1991). 10.1007/BF01048309